Sir, - Thanks to Jean Somers (Letters, January 20th), to your Editorials (January 9th and 13th), and to Conor O'Clery's articles from Asia, it appears that at last we are going to have a serious debate on the elephantine interventions of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) around the globe. The economic crisis in Asia seems to have exposed the disastrous effects of policies "masterminded" by US economists and dictated through the IMF. Most terrible has been the human cost - tens of thousands, if not millions, of children, women and men who have lost their lives as a result, albeit indirectly, of IMF-imposed policies throughout subSaharan Africa and Latin America over the past 15 years.
As Jean Somers pointed out, the IMF seems to have had little difficulty in finding $35 billion in its coffers for the ailing Asian "tigers", while it has repeatedly baulked at finding the $0.9 billion that would fund its share of the debt relief scheme which would greatly help heavily indebted low-income countries. Internationally, as well as nationally, it seems that we have practices and laws which are applied to deny the poor while the wealthy are exempted. It doesn't seem to matter that many lives could be saved by the $0.9 billion while the $35 billion would appear to be intended only to save banks and businesses, as well as stabilising currencies and restoring market confidence.
I wholeheartedly support the calls for democratisation of the IMF and for finding alternatives to current IMF policies. - Yours, etc., Colm Roddy,
Bayside Walk,
Dublin 13.